Walls Closing In on Syrian Regime

Vetoed U.N. sanctions still betray which way the wind is blowing

A statue of former President Hafez Assad wrapped in the Syrian flag during anti-regime protests a month ago.(Joseph Eid/AFP/Getty Images)

After months and months of the same old attrition, things are beginning to move faster. Yesterday, Bashar Assad’s government revoked a ban it had imposed a week ago on the import of consumer goods—a sign that it recognized that high prices were agitating its people (along with all the killing and besieging, presumably) and, more important, that it is vulnerable to such agitation; the abruptness signals that the regime is still feeling its way toward regaining a full hold over the country.

Yesterday, European countries led by Germany, Britain, France, and Portugal—and backed by the United States, which has declared that Assad’s time is up—pushed for a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning the regime and threatening sanctions. It was, however, vetoed by China and Russia (“a rare double veto,” according to ace U.N. beat reporter Colum Lynch). Notably, the resolution had already been watered down, and would have been the first Security Council recognition of the Syrian strife. Also notable was U.S. ambassador Susan Rice’s impassioned response: “The United States is outraged that this council has utterly failed to address an urgent moral challenge and a growing threat to regional peace and security,” she said. And her Twitter feed lit up with indignation: “This is a sad day. Most especially for the people of #Syria, but also for the UN Security Council”; “The UN Security Council has just utterly failed to address the Asad regime’s brutality. #Syria”; “The people of #Syria, who seek nothing more than their universal human rights, have been slapped in the face”; “Those who opposed the resolution and gave cover to a brutal regime will have to answer to the Syrian people.” For a diplomat, this wasn’t very diplomatic—probably a good thing, given the circumstances.

Neighboring Turkey, a crucial player, has started military maneuvers near the Syrian border, surprising even the Obama administration (pleasantly), and has gone ahead with its own sanctions. Joe Lieberman, Independent of Connecticut, became the first senator to call for the imposition of a no-fly zone to protect civilians. All this in addition, of course, to Monday’s Senate confirmation of the heroic Robert Ford as ambassador to Syria, a sign that the U.S. will not be cowed by attacks and intimidation. So clearly is the direction in which things are moving that even neighboring Lebanon’s new prime minister, necessarily backed by Assad ally Hezbollah, carefully began to distance himself from the regime, saying, “I wish for the Syrian people what Syrians wish for themselves.” He isn’t alone.

WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at letters@tabletmag.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

The “rare double veto” by Russia and China demonstrates something that Mark Tracy misses completely. That is, the UN belongs to the Organization of the Islamic Conference and our so called “allies” will go to any extrent to protect a Muslim country against the U.S. if they deem it to be in their interest.
The UN is not a moral force and should not interfere in member’s internal affairs. Just which country do you think will get the kick in the stomach as UN interference becomes more widespread and accepted? Take one guess.

Name (required)Email (required, will not be published)Website (optional)

Message

2000

Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.